 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Williams v. Erie Ins. Group3/8/1993
WILLIAM W. YOUNG, Judge.
Defendant-appellant, Erie Insurance Group ("Erie Insurance"), appeals a decision of the Washington Court House Municipal Court granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee, David Williams.
On July 2, 1988, an automobile driven by Patricia Williams was struck by Richard Dee Hodge. Appellee was a passenger in the vehicle driven by Patricia. Both appellee and Patricia suffered injuries as a result of the accident. On the date of the accident, Patricia was covered by an insurance policy that listed Erie Insurance as the insurer. In dispute, and the crux of the instant action, is whether appellee was a named insured under the same insurance policy. What is undisputed, however, is that Patricia's automobile insurance policy provided for medical payments of up to $5,000 for medical expenses of an occupant of the automobile who suffers injuries relating to an accident.
Appellee incurred medical expenses of at least $5,600 as a result of the accident. Erie Insurance paid appellee $5,000 towards these expenses pursuant to the insurance policy. Patricia incurred medical expenses of $2,274.57, which Erie Insurance also paid.
Sometime thereafter, appellee and Patricia brought a personal injury action against Hodge seeking damages for the injuries they suffered as a result of Hodge's alleged negligence. Appellee and Patricia subsequently entered into a settlement agreement with Hodge's insurer, Grange Mutual Casualty Company, whereby thee agreed to drop their suit and settle their claim in exchange for $7,274.57. Grange Mutual thereafter drafted a check in the amount of $7,274.57 and made it payable to Erie Insurance, David Williams, and Patricia Williams.
Upon learning of this settlement agreement, Erie Insurance demanded that appellee repay the $5,000 that it had paid to him. Erie Insurance argued that it had a right to recover the $5,000 that it had paid towards appellee's medical expenses because of the subrogation agreement found in Patricia's insurance policy. Appellee refused and on December 30, 1991 he filed an action for declaratory judgment, requesting that the trial court find that he was not a partsto the contract of insurance between Patricia and Erie Insurance. He also requested that the court find that Erie Insurance had neither a right to subrogation nor a right to be reimbursed for the $5,000. Finally, appellee demanded that the check that was made payable to Erie Insurance, Patricia and himself be disbursed in a manner wherein he would receive $5,000 and Erie Insurance would receive $2,274.57 (the amount Patricia collected from Erie Insurance for her medical payments).
In a judgment rendered in July 1992, the trial court held that there was no privity of contract between appellee and Erie Insurance. It further found that no written agreement existed subrogating appellee's rights or claims to Erie Insurance. Thus, the court ordered that Erie Insurance should receive $2,274.57, and that appellee should be paid $5,000. This appeal followed.
In its brief, Erie Insurance assigns the following three errors:
Assignment of Error No. 1:
"The trial court erred to the prejudice of defendant-appellant in holding that the plaintiff-appellee David Williams was not in privity of contract with defendant-appellant."
Assignment of Error No. 2:
"The trial court erred in holding that the case of Motorists Mutual Ins. v. Bates is applicable to the case at bar."
Assignment of Error No. 3:
"The trial court erred in holding that defendant-appellant Erie was not entitled to receive by subrogati
Page 1 2 3 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|